Discounting rooms

[superstition]

Hi I'm superstition and I've played under that name in both Pawngame beta and Pawntactics beta both of which i finished in the top 50.

I suggest discounting rooms instead of a multiplier. please read entire post.

A multiplier works by giving 1.2x points to the players in the map, a discount works by only giving .7x or less to CERTAIN members in the room. If we discounted the entry level rooms to people who hit a certain score, they will have little incentive to play there and will move to the intermediate rooms. I would take away the multiplier from them.
As a player advances higher and higher up the ranks, the discount rate changes depending upon how low they go, we could discount even the intermediate rooms for players 500k and above.

For example, a player at 100k gets discounted by .7x in the entry level rooms. Plays even at intermediate, and does not have access to advanced rooms.

A player at 500k gets discounted to .4x at the entry level rooms, .8 in the intermediate rooms, and plays even in the advanced rooms.

WHY DISCOUNT? WHY NOT MULTIPLY?

The lack of play in the beta multiplier rooms show that multipling does not work well. Its important for the integrity of the game to move people up along since as thier score increases, so does thier skill level. It doesn't do the new players any good having BETA masters in there scoring 40-4 in a game. As they become good, they should be nearly forced to play with people of thier skillset too.

I felt the biggest problem with PawnGames transition to open play was the lack of programming matching people in a game based on skill. This does not have to be Pawn Tactics problem.

[UnknownServer]

Heey Super,

This is a great idea, I think mulitplyer isn't working either and now that beta is over we have alot of new people wanting to try and they never stick with it because of all the experienced players keep owning everyone in the low rooms. We need to give the new players a fair chance against people there own skill level and not against people in the top 25.

Good work Super keep up the good work :)

[Balddude]

I agree. Right now, many of the people who have already gotten accustomed to the Pawn Tactics game are just going into packed deathmatch districts, epic assaults or CTF just to slaughter the new-comers. This is not right, just by looking at the overly inflated KD's of the beta players, and you can see that there is an obvious problem, I mean, a 4 KD overall? Come on man.

If the Discounting suggestion were to be used, people who have already gotten a hang of the game would be discouraged to keep fighting the new-comers, but instead go to higher skill level maps to put their skills to the test.

--Support--

[Itches]

For one no one really gives a damn how high ranked you were. Etc
Second of all i think we should leave multiplier for now..

[Calmador]

Hi I'm superstition and I've played under that name in both Pawngame beta and Pawntactics beta both of which i finished in the top 50.

I suggest discounting rooms instead of a multiplier. please read entire post.

A multiplier works by giving 1.2x points to the players in the map, a discount works by only giving .7x or less to CERTAIN members in the room. If we discounted the entry level rooms to people who hit a certain score, they will have little incentive to play there and will move to the intermediate rooms. I would take away the multiplier from them.
As a player advances higher and higher up the ranks, the discount rate changes depending upon how low they go, we could discount even the intermediate rooms for players 500k and above.

For example, a player at 100k gets discounted by .7x in the entry level rooms. Plays even at intermediate, and does not have access to advanced rooms.

A player at 500k gets discounted to .4x at the entry level rooms, .8 in the intermediate rooms, and plays even in the advanced rooms.

WHY DISCOUNT? WHY NOT MULTIPLY?

The lack of play in the beta multiplier rooms show that multipling does not work well. Its important for the integrity of the game to move people up along since as thier score increases, so does thier skill level. It doesn't do the new players any good having BETA masters in there scoring 40-4 in a game. As they become good, they should be nearly forced to play with people of thier skillset too.

I felt the biggest problem with PawnGames transition to open play was the lack of programming matching people in a game based on skill. This does not have to be Pawn Tactics problem.

(Epic Supports)

It's fair

[FrozenFlamez]

Good idea. I agree with the other people. PT would definitely be more fun with the discount

[hchanman]

Yesh... I play as kungfuchinaman in PT, and I have noticed time and again that the beta players, myself included, stray away from the rank requirement rooms because there really isn't enough to encourage us to play there. For the most part, betas and newcomers occupy the standard rooms.

I agree with Super, that this would be a great idea to implement for PT.

[amoaa]

I SAY MULTIPLY BECAUSE!


1.It gives new player a chance to strive to get stronger

2.keep them playing so they can get the last dude that got them


3.it would be stupid to disconnect because of Wat super said it make lots of seance

[UnknownServer]

I SAY MULTIPLY BECAUSE!


1.It gives new player a chance to strive to get stronger

2.keep them playing so they can get the last dude that got them


3.it would be stupid to disconnect because of Wat super said it make lots of seance

But with the new system Super is talking about new players will get there skill up against people there own skill and not beta players just owning then. I'm a beta player - MrShot11 - and on average every game in the entry games i get round 30 - 40 kiills and 5 - 10 deaths. It'd not letting the new players have a good chance at the game and they are quitting early into the game. Everyone knows the game is still a baby and will only grow if more people will play the game and get their skill up. Also we need everyone to Vs. people there own sklill level, make it more of a challenge. Mayb not on point like Super said but mayb rank if yous get me lol :)

[macro24]

Hmmm i agree LOL well i aint smart but neh i say YESS to this system but i dont think blank wont eva do anything anyway

[Parma]

Discount peoples scores on the lower maps as they move up the ranks.

Its an alright idea I guess, but PMR was the only person close to 1 000 000 points and when he got there he would have 200k lead.

Your saying someone in his position, points deserve to be deducted because they lead by such a large margin?

Its actually an alright idea, but the reason the higher rooms don't get played on is because they are usually empty.

Look, yes we all find fun in destroying new members, but any of the true people that deserve the name "Beta" is sick of facing the new players for easy points and want the challenge.

Super, when all cools down about this whole rank junk, I am sure more people will play in the other rooms, purely because most of the other ones do become repetitive.

My suggestion is have a close group of games for quicks and then lock of some rooms, like between 0-2000 points can go there, and then have all the rest as open rooms. So if they want they can go there.

[UnknownServer]

Discount peoples scores on the lower maps as they move up the ranks.

Its an alright idea I guess, but PMR was the only person close to 1 000 000 points and when he got there he would have 200k lead.

Your saying someone in his position, points deserve to be deducted because they lead by such a large margin?

Its actually an alright idea, but the reason the higher rooms don't get played on is because they are usually empty.

Look, yes we all find fun in destroying new members, but any of the true people that deserve the name "Beta" is sick of facing the new players for easy points and want the challenge.

Super, when all cools down about this whole rank junk, I am sure more people will play in the other rooms, purely because most of the other ones do become repetitive.

My suggestion is have a close group of games for quicks and then lock of some rooms, like between 0-2000 points can go there, and then have all the rest as open rooms. So if they want they can go there.

Thats why i said not on points but on rank, mayb top 25 or 50 get the reduction someone at 1 000 000 points would get, 50 - 200 get the nxt bit of reductions etc. If we were to actually do this we'd need to see some numbers for the reductions and plans on how we'd do it. We also need a mod to read this or blank or someone who can actually start it if they were to go on.:)

[Parma]

So what your saying is if you skilled enough to get higher through the ranks you deserve to lose amount of points you can gain instead of being rewarded? Look, I think we just need to keep the multiplier it seems quite pointless to make people gain less points because they are ahead of other players.

[UnknownServer]

noo im not saying that im saying it will force the better players to play in higher maps with people there own skill which clears the free entry games of better players giving everyone better and fairer game play.

[Spongebob]

Sure.. I agree with everyone else..

[superstition]

So what your saying is if you skilled enough to get higher through the ranks you deserve to lose amount of points you can gain instead of being rewarded? Look, I think we just need to keep the multiplier it seems quite pointless to make people gain less points because they are ahead of other players.


We wouldn't be taking points away. We would be awarding points at a discounted rank BUT ONLY when they play in the entry level rooms. They will still earn points at the even rate when they play in the room that corresponds to thier rank.

The details of the system arent worked out but it would go something like this:

3 levels-
Entry level<12,000. Even scoring in entry level rooms. No access to others.

200,000> Intermediate level >12,0000. Discounted at .7 in entry level rooms. Plays even at intermediate rooms. No access to advanced rooms.

Advanced >200,000. Discounted to .3 in entry level rooms. Discounted to .7
in the intermediate rooms. Plays even in the advanced rooms.

THESE NUMBERS ARE JUST AN EXAMPLE, NOT TO BE DEBATED. THE CONCEPT IS WHAT NEEDS TO BE UNDERSTOOD.

There could be any amount of levels, and change the discount rates depending upon what is enough to get people to play with thier own skillset.

REMEMBER- I suggest this method as opposed to the multiplier becuase the multiplier failed in beta. It doesn't force players to move along to different rooms. It is necessary that people move along for proper developement of new players, integrity of KD ratios, and competitiveness of the game.

When beta players started PT we only had other noobs to play with, there weren't 7 month veterans on the field.

An example- Yahoo! Chess uses a very steep discounting system. It is used to highly rated players can't beef up thier score on weaker ones. It nearly forces people to play against someone with thier own skill. And it works.

[Headhitter]

This would rly own. Now its too easy to get scores like 20-2 in Deathmatch District

[superstition]

Right on.

We would be saying to a player with 500,000 points. That if they kill an ENTRY LEVEL player, in an ENTRY LEVEL room. They get 4 points for that kill instead of 10 (Assumes a .4 discount). Everyone can agree that killing a veteran and killing a brand new player aren't equal achievements. When they veteran at 500,000 goes to the veteran rooms and plays a game he will earn even points. 10 points a kill. (assumes even scoring of 1)

In the current system- the veteran gets credited the same 10 points for killing the entry level player and gets 12 for killing a vet ( assuming multiplier of 1.2)
However, this didn't work becuase veterans still get EVEN scoring, just the same scoring in the entry level rooms and can still advanced along in points nicely without participating in the higher rooms. Under the discount system, a players score will increase slower than a dial up download unless they move along. Moving along will keep KD ratio's honest, will give new players breathing room, and will make sure vets play vets and noobs play noobs. This will make EACH 10 minute game played in PT all the richer.

[Betsinator]

no because i think new players should get to see how people above them play so they can learn

[Blackpetrus]

i aggree to that idea

Blackpetrus

[woohoo]

Thisis all fine and good until nobody close toyour score is on and you lose up to 30 percent of your score because of it.

[vAero]

Epic Support.

[goliath079]

i agree with this its a great idea and well ya you should think about implimenting this

[SLAGATHOR]

I think this is an awesome idea. Hopefully Blank listens. (sometimes)

[UnknownServer]

no because i think new players should get to see how people above them play so they can learn

the thing is they wont learn because people like yourself and other top 25 people keep owning them, people are getting 50 -10 and even 70 - 13 in maps now. This is due to the amount opf new players to PT and they dont really stay because they get owned. They wont learn by fighting the best PT'ers but only learn when fighting people their own skill and developing from that.

[superstition]

THis idea, i posted long ago, would have been better than putting the multipliers so high.

This would maintain the integrity of our top 100 charts and stuff